Civilian
Your strength is to turn conversations into hypotheses that can be checked. Do not mistake someone who exposes another gang for an ally of the city.
A civilian has no night checks and does not know the line-up of the gangs. Their resources are public statements, the behaviour of the participants, the sequence of votes and logical contradictions.
The first day: create positions that can be checked
Ask players to name not only a suspect but also a reason. Clarify which actions would change their mind. Compare the answers of different players. Do not demand instant certainty from everyone: a lack of certainty at the start is natural, and certainty on its own proves nothing.
Questions that give information
"Why this player and not another?", "Whom do you consider the most dangerous for the city?", "If your version is wrong, who is the next candidate?", "Why did you vote differently from what you said?" What matters is not the number of questions but the chance to compare the answers with future actions.
How to weigh suspicions
Separate an observation ("no. 4 defended no. 7") from a conclusion ("they are in the same gang"). In Irish Mafia a conclusion is especially unreliable: no. 4 may be from the rival gang and be deliberately keeping no. 7 alive. Note the alternative explanations and do not turn a single gesture into proof.
Voting and risk
Before voting, weigh not only the probability that the candidate is mafia but also the consequences of removing them. Removing one Irish player can strengthen the Italians, and the other way round. This is not a reason to spare a known mafioso without grounds; it is a reason to see the whole structure of the table, not a single duel.
After the night
Write down who was killed, which versions the victim voiced and who could gain from their death. Do not automatically blame a particular gang for the kill: a hidden queue applies, and a target chosen by both is certain to die.
Do not blame a particular gang: whether a shot counts is hidden. The causes of a death can differ: hunting the Sheriff, removing an analyst, an attempt to get rid of a rival, creating a false trail.
How to react to the Sheriff
Check the sequence of the claimed checks and whether the story fits the public history. Do not treat every confident reveal as true: an opponent can imitate the Sheriff. Do not reject a statement just because it is inconvenient for your earlier version.
Typical mistakes
Voting by charisma; treating a successful exposure of a mafioso as a guarantee that the accuser is a civilian; ignoring the other gang; confusing doubt with a lie; forgetting that the roles of the dead stay hidden.
Do not confuse confidence with proof, do not ignore the second gang, and do not take matching votes as proof of an alliance.
The first day
The aim is not to guess roles but to get positions that can be checked. Ask players to name candidates, arguments and the conditions under which they would change their mind. Record who first put forward a version, who joined and who changed their vote.
When the Sheriff reveals themselves
Compare the timeline of checks and speeches, the number of checks available and how specific the results are. A real Sheriff can be wrong strategically; a false one can speak convincingly.
In a tie vote
Analyse not only the result but also the changes of position. Apply the approved Sport Mafia rulebook without new procedures.